Two Watchdog Groups Frown On Montco Appointment Process

Two government watchdog groups yesterday criticized the process used in Montgomery County to appoint new Commissioner Richard Buckman.

Buckman, formerly the county controller, is serving the final year of a four-year term for U.S. Rep. Jon Fox, R-13th District, who won election to Congress in November.

Buckman was selected earlier this month in secret by a panel of 14 Montgomery County judges. When the bench, headed by President Judge William Nicholas, announced its decision, it issued a statement that simply named Buckman.

The names and credentials of other applicants were not released. There 40 were applicants in all, nine of whom were interviewed, Nicholas said yesterday.

"That is done that way out of respect for the privacy of the people who apply," Nicholas said. "This talk about secrecy I think is a bit overdone."

Common Cause Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania Newspaper Publishers Association conceded yesterday that state law does not require judges to make the selection process public. But no law prevents them from doing so, either, they said.

County resident Joe Del Pizzo of Lower Merion Township read a statement at yesterday's commissioners meeting blasting the judges for the "public-be-damned way in which our new commissioner was appointed."

He said he chose the public forum for his criticism to send a message to the judges because he had not been able to make contact with Nicholas by telephone.

"Mr. Buckman may or may not have been the best candidate," Del Pizzo said, "but the public will never know because of the arrogant and secret way in which he was appointed."

Minority Commissioner Joseph Hoeffel, a Democrat, agreed that more information should be made available to the public.

"That's the best speech I've heard in three years" as a commissioner, he said. "These things should be as open as possible and it's something the board of judges should consider. They could announce vote totals; they could release names."

Republicans Mario Mele and Buckman said they had no problem with the process, since they were happy with the result.

Barry Kauffman, executive director of Common Cause Pennsylvania, said the judges robbed county residents of their chance to have an impact on the appointment.

Kauffman said residents should be told who the candidates are. If they think one of them "is a real sleazebucket," he said, "they should be able to direct their comments -- pro or con -- to the appointed authority."

"I respect that point," Nicholas said in response. "There might be something about one of these people that someone might know. As with everything, you weigh plusses and minuses," he said, and the importance of privacy takes precedent. "I think we made the right call."

Although there is only one year remaining on Fox's term, Kauffman said, Buckman's power should not be underestimated. "This person might be a swing vote on a lot of important issues," he said.

Kauffman also said the process should be opened "to make sure the judges aren't appointing some flunkie that the political hierarchy owes favors to. If these kinds of deliberations are done in public, the odds of a flunkie being appointed instead of a highly-qualified person are reduced."

Tim Knapp, legislative counsel for the Pennsylvania Newspaper Publishers Assocation, said his organization recently lost a Commonwealth Court case over a secret school board appointment in Cumberland County. He said the court ruled that closed-door appointments did not violate the state law concerning open government.

However, he said, there is no law saying appointments have to be conducted in secret.

"If you're running for office on a ballot," Knapp said, "obviously it's a public campaign." Appointments, he said, "should be open in the same way an election is."

"When you have things that are closed, you think of things like cronyism," he said. "I'm not saying that's happening ... but it seems that there ought to be more dialogue that goes on."